Dock/Undock to reset 30 minute timer

[ShawnoftheDread]

I don’t know what the right answer is, but I do know if I was riding up to an empty station and saw someone waiting for a bike, I’d keep riding and eat the fee.

[dasgeh]

@mstone 58878 wrote:

Skirting the extended use fee isn’t some kind of right, and holding a bike for an extended period misses the point of bike share (versus bike rental). If someone is waiting for a bike and you’re too cheap to pay the fee, it should be their turn. Presumably cabi can add a timeout if people become too abusive of the current configuration.

But daisy-chaining is a right under the current CaBi setup. Maybe they should add a waiting time (honestly, 60 seconds should work for this purpose), but under the current system, paying the fee just lines CaBi’s pockets when they have empty docks.

[Tim Kelley]

@dasgeh 58907 wrote:

paying the fee just lines CaBi’s pockets when they have empty docks.

Ah yes, lining the pockets of an big faceless corporation that would just go and use the money to cover operating and expansion expenses…

[dasgeh]

@Tim Kelley 58912 wrote:

Ah yes, lining the pockets of an big faceless corporation that would just go and use the money to cover operating and expansion expenses…

Fair enough.

[ShawnoftheDread]

@dasgeh 58907 wrote:

But daisy-chaining is a right under the current CaBi setup. Maybe they should add a waiting time (honestly, 60 seconds should work for this purpose), but under the current system, paying the fee just lines CaBi’s pockets when they have empty docks.

Is it a “right” or simply an ability?

[rcannon100]

@Tim Kelley 58912 wrote:

Ah yes, lining the pockets of an big faceless corporation that would just go and use the money to cover operating and expansion expenses…

If ALTA and CABI are having difficulty with their revenue model, then ALTA and CABI needs to solve that problem. This still does not put the blame on the customer for either empty docks or blocked docks. The behavior described is perfectly legitimate under the terms of service. And given the mesh network, the need to use a bike for 35 minutes, instead of 30 minutes, to get across the network, is reasonable. It is a behavior permitted by the terms of service and the design of the system. If ALTA and CABI cannot support and maintain the system (both in terms of revenue and in terms of maintaining it), then ALTA and CABI needs to solve the problem – not the customer.

[Tim Kelley]

@rcannon100 58926 wrote:

The behavior described is perfectly legitimate under the terms of service.

So you would do the dock/undock process and keep riding to save the $1.50? And if the person waiting for the bike approached you, you would tell them to take it up with the operators?

[rcannon100]

@ShawnoftheDread 58921 wrote:

Is it a “right” or simply an ability?

It is right of a party to a contract – here the contract being the terms of service. It is also a feature that CABI regularly promotes. We are CABI Silver partners and goDCgo has participated in several marketing events. In those events, this behavior of checking in and checking back out again, is a feature that goDCgo has repeatedly promoted.

[rcannon100]

@Tim Kelley 58928 wrote:

So you would do the dock/undock process and keep riding to save the $1.50? And if the person waiting for the bike approached you, you would tell them to take it up with the operators?

I would participate in a forum in which I have this perception that CABI contractors are listening – and tell them – dont blame customers if they are failing to maintain the system properly. If you have sold subscriptions to a service with representations of how that service will work – it is your responsibility to fulfill your obligations.

WMATA doesnt get to blame riders when WMATA fails. Should CABI be allowed to do so?

The ability of CABI to operate the system – to prevent dock blocks or empty docks – will be directly reflected in consumer value of the system. If the system struggles to be balanced, customers will place a lower value on the system. Much like the reliability issues of WMATA, the value of CABI as a transportation solution will go down. As a matter of transportation public policy, this is a problem. If CABI is to be part of the smart growth, transportation system – it needs to function properly and as it represents to the public that it will do. The moment CABI starts blame shifting and suggesting that it is customer misbehavior at the root here – when CABI has failed to balance the system – we have a problem. If using CABI results in customer moral dilemmas about who gets to use a scarce resource, then CABI will no longer be a viable transportation solution. CABI as a value to customers who are simply trying to get across the city will go down.

[Tim Kelley]

@rcannon100 58930 wrote:

I would participate in a forum in which I have this perception that CABI contractors are listening – and tell them – dont blame customers if they are failing to maintain the system properly. If you have sold subscriptions to a service with representations of how that service will work – it is your responsibility to fulfill your obligations.

WMATA doesnt get to blame riders when WMATA fails. Should CABI be allowed to do so?

That didn’t answer my question. Would you do the dock/undock process and keep riding to save the $1.50? And then my original question from the first page was: Would you feel bad taking their ride from them?

It seems we’ve gotten off topic–I’m more interesting in how the cycling community would act/respond in certain situations than who is to blame if a station if full.

[Dickie]

If you see someone waiting for a CABI and you dock, wait, and then take the bike back out again to save a few bucks the question shouldn’t be “are you within your rights”? The question should be “are you OK being a jerk”? It’s a similar action to those folks that ignore the giant flashing construction arrow on the highway and drive past everyone before forcing a merge at the very last second…. You know….screw everyone else to save a few minutes, dollars, etc…. because I matter most!

[bobco85]

I think proper social etiquette would be to give up your ride if you decide to return it to a docking station in non-emergency cases. When I dock a CaBi bike, in my head the bike is no longer “mine.” If I was running late or some other emergency, I would just eat the $1.50 and avoid docking as it would waste time.

The reason I came to this conclusion is by imagining myself as the person waiting for a bike at an empty CaBi station. You see someone roll up and dock their bike, so you walk over to get the bike since you’re “next” only to see the person undock and take off with what you thought was “your” bike. It’s a total d*** move, but completely within the rules that CaBi has created and promoted.

[dasgeh]

@Tim Kelley 58932 wrote:

That didn’t answer my question. Would you do the dock/undock process and keep riding to save the $1.50? And then my original question from the first page was: Would you feel bad taking their ride from them?

It seems we’ve gotten off topic–I’m more interesting in how the cycling community would act/respond in certain situations than who is to blame if a station if full.

But you haven’t taken “their ride from them”. It was never their ride. You’ve got the bike. The only thing that changes if you pull up to a station to daisy chain v. continuing on is that you get charged. Either way, waiting guy is left waiting.

If you pulled up to the waiting guy and said “I’m not done with my ride. I can either daisy-chain or pay an extra $1.50. Which would you prefer?” Wouldn’t he be the jerk if he asked you to eat the $1.50?

I do think the polite this is to say something to the effect of “sorry, man, I’m just daisy-chaining”

[dasgeh]

@Dickie 58937 wrote:

If you see someone waiting for a CABI and you dock, wait, and then take the bike back out again to save a few bucks the question shouldn’t be “are you within your rights”? The question should be “are you OK being a jerk”? It’s a similar action to those folks that ignore the giant flashing construction arrow on the highway and drive past everyone before forcing a merge at the very last second…. You know….screw everyone else to save a few minutes, dollars, etc…. because I matter most!

Ah, this argument. The process that would be most efficient for all is for everyone to slow to a safe speed, and for the people in the disappearing lane to merge at the last second. Unfortunately, lots of people merge early, then get all righteous on the people that are using the available asphalt. [**Note: if those people are using the available asphalt at unsafe speeds, I agree they’re jerks**] Being efficient does not make me a jerk.

[KLizotte]

@rcannon100 58930 wrote:

I would participate in a forum in which I have this perception that CABI contractors are listening – and tell them – dont blame customers if they are failing to maintain the system properly. If you have sold subscriptions to a service with representations of how that service will work – it is your responsibility to fulfill your obligations.

WMATA doesnt get to blame riders when WMATA fails. Should CABI be allowed to do so?

The ability of CABI to operate the system – to prevent dock blocks or empty docks – will be directly reflected in consumer value of the system. If the system struggles to be balanced, customers will place a lower value on the system. Much like the reliability issues of WMATA, the value of CABI as a transportation solution will go down. As a matter of transportation public policy, this is a problem. If CABI is to be part of the smart growth, transportation system – it needs to function properly and as it represents to the public that it will do. The moment CABI starts blame shifting and suggesting that it is customer misbehavior at the root here – when CABI has failed to balance the system – we have a problem. If using CABI results in customer moral dilemmas about who gets to use a scarce resource, then CABI will no longer be a viable transportation solution. CABI as a value to customers who are simply trying to get across the city will go down.

But CaBi is different from WMATA due to its sharing aspect. I think of CaBi as more like a library than a subway system. A library’s utility goes down if people deface the books and routinely check out books for the longest period possible through multiple renewals even when they are not in need of the books they have borrowed. In fact, some libraries do not let you renew if someone has put a hold on the item you have checked out. Perhaps CaBi could employ the same rule?

If I saw someone waiting for a bike at a docking station I would not dock/undock to save a few bucks. That’s like cutting in line if you ask me.

[Author]

Posts